HAWK Thread

[US 89]

I came across a HAWK signal on US 30 in Kimberly, ID yesterday, and it might be the worst installation of one I've ever seen. There's not even a crosswalk. It's an emergency signal that activates when a fire truck comes out of the station at the end of that driveway. This is not at all what these things were designed for. No point in having a flashing red phase if the fire truck is already out? It's also only a few hundred feet from the light at SH 50.

Far more preferable would be a 3-section signal with flashing yellow in the bottom, which is already used elsewhere in Idaho (as in this example in Pocatello).

[cjw2001]

I came across a HAWK signal on US 30 in Kimberly, ID yesterday, and it might be the worst installation of one I've ever seen. There's not even a crosswalk. It's an emergency signal that activates when a fire truck comes out of the station at the end of that driveway. This is not at all what these things were designed for. No point in having a flashing red phase if the fire truck is already out? It's also only a few hundred feet from the light at SH 50.

Far more preferable would be a 3-section signal with flashing yellow in the bottom, which is already used elsewhere in Idaho (as in this example in Pocatello).

That's a emergency vehicle hybrid beacon compliant with the mutdc https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/part4g.htm#:~:text=Vehicle%20Hybrid%20Beacons-,Standard%3A,authorized%20emergency%20or%20maintenance%20personnel.

[US 89]

I came across a HAWK signal on US 30 in Kimberly, ID yesterday, and it might be the worst installation of one I've ever seen. There's not even a crosswalk. It's an emergency signal that activates when a fire truck comes out of the station at the end of that driveway. This is not at all what these things were designed for. No point in having a flashing red phase if the fire truck is already out? It's also only a few hundred feet from the light at SH 50.

Far more preferable would be a 3-section signal with flashing yellow in the bottom, which is already used elsewhere in Idaho (as in this example in Pocatello).

That's a emergency vehicle hybrid beacon compliant with the mutdc https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part4/part4g.htm#:~:text=Vehicle%20Hybrid%20Beacons-,Standard%3A,authorized%20emergency%20or%20maintenance%20personnel.

Hm. Thanks for sharing that. I'd never seen one used as an emergency signal before.

Still doesn't change my opinion that this is the wrong signal for the situation, though.

[SignBridge]

Regarding fire station signals, I agree that the one with the flashing yellow, shown in Pocatello, Id. is a more effective design than the hybrid beacon. In fact Nassau County, Long Island where I live uses that design as standard for fire stations on county roads here. But as the above poster said, the Manual does authorize that hybrid beacon for emergency signals, so yeah let the games begin again with dark signals.

[DRMan]

I posted in another thread about this situation in Tucson, where a HAWK beacon and an emergency beacon are within half a block (emergency beacon in the background).

https://goo.gl/maps/SrJtdgqbznwJMZRS9

The difference between the two being that the emergency beacon does not have the steady red phase that a HAWK has.

Section 4F.03 Operation of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
Standard:
...
02 Upon actuation by a pedestrian, a pedestrian hybrid beacon face shall display a flashing CIRCULAR yellow signal indication, followed by a steady CIRCULAR yellow signal indication, followed by both steady CIRCULAR RED signal indications during the pedestrian walk interval, followed by alternating flashing CIRCULAR RED signal indications during the pedestrian clearance interval (see Figure 4F-3). Upon termination of the pedestrian clearance interval, the pedestrian hybrid beacon faces shall revert to a dark (not illuminated) condition.

Section 4G.04 Emergency-Vehicle Hybrid Beacons
...
06 Upon actuation by authorized emergency personnel, the emergency-vehicle hybrid beacon faces shall each display a flashing yellow signal indication, followed by a steady yellow change interval, prior to displaying two CIRCULAR RED signal indications in an alternating flashing array for a duration of time adequate for egress of the emergency vehicles. The alternating flashing red signal indications shall only be displayed when it is required that drivers on the major street stop and then proceed subject to the rules applicable after making a stop at a STOP sign. Upon termination of the flashing red signal indications, the emergency-vehicle hybrid beacons shall revert to a dark mode (no indications displayed) condition.

In both cases, flashing red signals equate to a STOP sign, so at least there's some consistency.

[cjw2001]

I posted in another thread about this situation in Tucson, where a HAWK beacon and an emergency beacon are within half a block (emergency beacon in the background).

https://goo.gl/maps/SrJtdgqbznwJMZRS9

The difference between the two being that the emergency beacon does not have the steady red phase that a HAWK has.

Actually it can, it is just optional instead of required...

Option:
10 A steady red clearance interval may be used after the steady yellow change interval.

[SignBridge]

Just what we need to add to the confusion for drivers. Two kinds of signals that look alike but operate differently

[DRMan]

I posted in another thread about this situation in Tucson, where a HAWK beacon and an emergency beacon are within half a block (emergency beacon in the background).

https://goo.gl/maps/SrJtdgqbznwJMZRS9

The difference between the two being that the emergency beacon does not have the steady red phase that a HAWK has.

Actually it can, it is just optional instead of required...

Option:
10 A steady red clearance interval may be used after the steady yellow change interval.

You are correct, I didn't read down far enough. Thanks for pointing this out. But why the steady red is optional is beyond me.

[roadfro]

I posted in another thread about this situation in Tucson, where a HAWK beacon and an emergency beacon are within half a block (emergency beacon in the background).

https://goo.gl/maps/SrJtdgqbznwJMZRS9

From that link, it's actually the HAWK that's in the background.

As an aside, zooming out a bit, notice that the emergency signal has the white-on-red "Fire Station 5" 'street name' sign. Totally not MUTCD compliant, but I kinda like it!

[SignBridge]

And that Tucson example is yet another case where the HAWK was installed at an intersection of a street controlled by a stop sign, contrary to MUTCD rec's. 

[fwydriver405]

Saw my first PHB/HAWK in the entire State of Maine today... read below. This replaced a normal RYG crosswalk, and the FR phase doesn't occur until after the ped phase has ended.

I just saw my first Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (also called a High intensity Activated crossWalK, HAWK) in the entire State of Maine in Portland, at the intersection of Congress and Lascell Streets. It appears to have been installed 2-3 weeks ago from the last time I drove thru there. This used to be just a standard RYG ped signal.

MaineDOT has historically been opposed to PHBs, instead prefering Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) (from what I'm told after doing numerous crosswalk projects in the state), but I noticed this was installed under WIN LAP018664.00 from a source I was told by. So I'm not sure if the DOT is testing out PHBs and using this as a trial location, or if this was a City of Portland installation and Portland wanted to test the PHBs.

Here is what I observed:
- The cabinet seems to be reused from the old setup, but I'm unsure if they replaced the controller as well (Believe it was an old TS1 controller).
- The flashing phase DOES NOT happen until after the FDW ends. It flashes red (in the normal wig-wag setup) for 5 seconds before going dark.
- Some drivers seem to understand what to do during the flashing red phase (treat as STOP sign, then proceed then clear) unlike in New Hampshire, but some drivers just sat there until it went dark.
- There were some red light runners well after the WALK phase was active and the red lights were activated.

Have any more of these appeared statewide as a PHB? For the record I'm not talking about the one in Scarborough which acts as an Emergency Vehicle Hybrid Beacon, installed in the mid 2010s.

[mrsman]

Here is a HAWK in my area that is the worst of both worlds.  It is on the way to my child's school, so I am now passing it by regularly.

Aspen Hill Rd in suburban Md near Wheaton and Rockville between Georgia Ave and Connecticut Ave.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0803106,-77.0783766,3a,37.5y,278.94h,90.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Nw7t7UYiEilRcUvHdUWWA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

A HAWK signal that does not flash.  When activeated, it goes from flashing yellow, to solid yellow, to solid red.  And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.  And its location is such that stopped traffic will back up into the intersection with Connecticut as well as the driveways from the nearby shopping centers.

IMO, it seems like a HAWK was used since it did not meet normal signal warrants, especially considering that mistimed HAWK signals will disrupt side traffic as well.  So a HAWK signal is used, but if it stops traffic in a manner similar to a regular traffic signal, then a non-warranted signal should not be placed.  One of the few saving graces about a badly placed HAWK signal is that traffic is only briefly stopped to allow pedestrians to cross.  By staying solid red for the entire cycle, this signal will produce more backups and is in a truly bad location.

[kphoger]

And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.

Report it as non-compliant.

[mrsman]

Here is a HAWK in my area that is the worst of both worlds.  It is on the way to my child's school, so I am now passing it by regularly.

Aspen Hill Rd in suburban Md near Wheaton and Rockville between Georgia Ave and Connecticut Ave.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0803106,-77.0783766,3a,37.5y,278.94h,90.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2Nw7t7UYiEilRcUvHdUWWA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

A HAWK signal that does not flash.  When activeated, it goes from flashing yellow, to solid yellow, to solid red.  And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.  And its location is such that stopped traffic will back up into the intersection with Connecticut as well as the driveways from the nearby shopping centers.

IMO, it seems like a HAWK was used since it did not meet normal signal warrants, especially considering that mistimed HAWK signals will disrupt side traffic as well.  So a HAWK signal is used, but if it stops traffic in a manner similar to a regular traffic signal, then a non-warranted signal should not be placed.  One of the few saving graces about a badly placed HAWK signal is that traffic is only briefly stopped to allow pedestrians to cross.  By staying solid red for the entire cycle, this signal will produce more backups and is in a truly bad location.

I wrote to the local DOT and got this response:

MCDOT installed the first HAWK signal in 2010. The County's HAWK signal is unique in its design. MCDOT made an engineering decision not to use the alternating flashing circular red interval due to concerns of confusing drivers. MCDOT applied for approval from Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration (MDOT SHA) to install the HAWK signal without using the alternating flashing red interval. MDOT SHA has also installed a similar HAWK signal at East West Highway (MD 410) and Bethesda Chevy Chase High School Driveway. Regarding the timing of this HAWK signal, MCDOT has made timing adjustments to better coordinate the HAWK with the signal at Connecticut Avenue.

The above is the official explanation, but I still don't like it.  If drivers are going to come to a complete stop anyway, without a flashing red phase, then why not just put in place a regular traffic signal?

[JoePCool14]

Because whoever is in charge of that HAWK is most likely not a traffic engineer.

[SignBridge]

Because whoever is in charge of that HAWK is most likely not a traffic engineer.

You're saying that HAWK signals are being spec'd and installed by people other than traffic engineers? So who do you think is doing them?

[Amtrakprod]

And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.

Report it as non-compliant.

Are you guys serious ? Do you know how dangerous in most cases it is so have a beacon flash red while pedestrians are in a crosswalk ? Near a school, that's bad practice.

Yes, maybe it creates traffic. This is a city. There's going to be traffic. Maybe inspiring more children to walk will improve the traffic instead.

The issue with those MCDOT HAWKs for me is the lack of a cooldown phase. You can start it right after it just went off, with 0 delay. Probably not great


iPhone

[US 89]

And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.

Report it as non-compliant.

Are you guys serious ? Do you know how dangerous in most cases it is so have a beacon flash red while pedestrians are in a crosswalk ? Near a school, that's bad practice.

Yes, maybe it creates traffic. This is a city. There's going to be traffic. Maybe inspiring more children to walk will improve the traffic instead.

The issue with those MCDOT HAWKs for me is the lack of a cooldown phase. You can start it right after it just went off, with 0 delay. Probably not great

That is not how a HAWK is supposed to be used though. If you want everyone to stop for the entire pedestrian crossing time, just install a regular signal.

Your statement of "how dangerous it is" might be the biggest hyperbole I've seen this month. What makes that any worse than putting in an RRFB or overhead flashing beacon? In my experience, the simple fact that something is flashing is enough to get drivers to pay attention and stop accordingly. And with HAWKs it may be a moot point anyway in a lot of cases since it seems a lot of drivers don't realize you can go after stopping on those flashing reds...

[fwydriver405]

That is not how a HAWK is supposed to be used though. If you want everyone to stop for the entire pedestrian crossing time, just install a regular signal.

Funny enough, this PHB in Portland near Congress @ Lasell replaced a normal RYG signal, however, as of August 2022, the flashing red phase only activates AFTER the W and FDW phase for about 3-7 sec before going dark.

I talked to the firm yesterday who installed this as part of LAP018664.00 and they said this is the first PHB out of two to be installed in the state, the second one being in Lewiston. They said they there's been "severe red light running" ever since it's been converted and they are thinking about either adding more signs and/or getting the police to do some enforcement.

MaineDOT has been adamant to install PHBs for years now, this being one of the reasons why and from what I'm told by the firm, a strange quirk/technicality in Maine's crosswalk law. They've been preferring RRFBs for a while now but starting to be open with PHBs in 2022. Not sure if the steady red during FDW was a Portland, MaineDOT and/or a the firm's designer's decision.

[Rothman]

Ugh, I forgot about the rebranding of HAWKs.  No, sorry, you're not fooling anyone.

[fwydriver405]

Ugh, I forgot about the rebranding of HAWKs.  No, sorry, you're not fooling anyone.

HAWK rebranding? Thought those were always (offically) called Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) per the 2009 MUTCD, unless you're talking about something else.

[Rothman]

Ugh, I forgot about the rebranding of HAWKs.  No, sorry, you're not fooling anyone.

HAWK rebranding? Thought those were always (offically) called Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) per the 2009 MUTCD, unless you're talking about something else.

HAWK was the original acronym, long before inclusion in the 2009 MUTCD.

[jakeroot]

Hmm. Pelican, Puffin, Hawk, PHB....one of these does not belong!

[mrsman]

And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.

Report it as non-compliant.

Are you guys serious ? Do you know how dangerous in most cases it is so have a beacon flash red while pedestrians are in a crosswalk ? Near a school, that's bad practice.

Yes, maybe it creates traffic. This is a city. There's going to be traffic. Maybe inspiring more children to walk will improve the traffic instead.

The issue with those MCDOT HAWKs for me is the lack of a cooldown phase. You can start it right after it just went off, with 0 delay. Probably not great

That is not how a HAWK is supposed to be used though. If you want everyone to stop for the entire pedestrian crossing time, just install a regular signal.

Your statement of "how dangerous it is" might be the biggest hyperbole I've seen this month. What makes that any worse than putting in an RRFB or overhead flashing beacon? In my experience, the simple fact that something is flashing is enough to get drivers to pay attention and stop accordingly. And with HAWKs it may be a moot point anyway in a lot of cases since it seems a lot of drivers don't realize you can go after stopping on those flashing reds...

That's exactly right.  There are different standards for the use of a full traffic signal and a HAWK.  A full traffic signal has to meet signal warrants.  And they cannot be placed in nearly as many places as an unsignalized crosswalk.  And in some states there are guidelines as to how close to another signal they can be placed.

A HAWK is designed to make an unsignalized crossing safer for a pedestrian.  The HAWK is a beacon, not a signal.  It does not have to meet warrants and is designed to encourage proper behavior at an unsignalized crossing.

Let's imagine an unsignalized crossing on a relatively busy road.  By law, in most states, a car must yield to a pedestrian, when a pedestrian is crossing the road.  The car must stop to let the pedestrian cross and then may proceed once the pedestrian is out of the way.  But in reality, it is not always easy to see the pedestrian, and cars don't always stop, so pedestrians usually wait until there is a gap in traffic (either no cars coming, or a car actually stopping for the pedestrian) before making the crossing.  And very likely traffic in the opposing direction will also come to a stop, once they see the pedestrian making the crossing.

The HAWK is meant to mimic the ideal behavior.  The signal will flash yellow to warn cars to the presence of pedestrians, and then lead to solid yellow to warn of the upcoming red signal.  THe red signal will force the cars to stop, so that the pedestrians can safely BEGIN their journey.  But after a few seconds (usually at the time when WALK changes to FDW) the red signal becomes a flashing red signal.  Since the cars are already stopped, the cars will remain stopping if there are pedestrians still in the crosswalk.  But if there are no pedestrians there, the cars may proceed after coming to a solid stop.  The HAWK is there to make sure that the cars stop for pedestrians, and not simply stop for a red light that may be longer than necessary, since most pedestrians walk faster than 3.5 ft/sec.

A well designed HAWK will only cause traffic stop long enough to allow the pedestrians to cross, much like the ideal behavior at an unsignalized crosswalk.  As such, the red time should be minimal and warrants aren't necessary, since traffic is only stopped vbriefly.

[Amtrakprod]

And it remains solid red for the duration of the entire pedestriand phase.

Report it as non-compliant.

Are you guys serious ? Do you know how dangerous in most cases it is so have a beacon flash red while pedestrians are in a crosswalk ? Near a school, that's bad practice.

Yes, maybe it creates traffic. This is a city. There's going to be traffic. Maybe inspiring more children to walk will improve the traffic instead.

The issue with those MCDOT HAWKs for me is the lack of a cooldown phase. You can start it right after it just went off, with 0 delay. Probably not great

That is not how a HAWK is supposed to be used though. If you want everyone to stop for the entire pedestrian crossing time, just install a regular signal.

Your statement of "how dangerous it is" might be the biggest hyperbole I've seen this month. What makes that any worse than putting in an RRFB or overhead flashing beacon? In my experience, the simple fact that something is flashing is enough to get drivers to pay attention and stop accordingly. And with HAWKs it may be a moot point anyway in a lot of cases since it seems a lot of drivers don't realize you can go after stopping on those flashing reds...

That's exactly right.  There are different standards for the use of a full traffic signal and a HAWK.  A full traffic signal has to meet signal warrants.  And they cannot be placed in nearly as many places as an unsignalized crosswalk.  And in some states there are guidelines as to how close to another signal they can be placed.

A HAWK is designed to make an unsignalized crossing safer for a pedestrian.  The HAWK is a beacon, not a signal.  It does not have to meet warrants and is designed to encourage proper behavior at an unsignalized crossing.

Let's imagine an unsignalized crossing on a relatively busy road.  By law, in most states, a car must yield to a pedestrian, when a pedestrian is crossing the road.  The car must stop to let the pedestrian cross and then may proceed once the pedestrian is out of the way.  But in reality, it is not always easy to see the pedestrian, and cars don't always stop, so pedestrians usually wait until there is a gap in traffic (either no cars coming, or a car actually stopping for the pedestrian) before making the crossing.  And very likely traffic in the opposing direction will also come to a stop, once they see the pedestrian making the crossing.

The HAWK is meant to mimic the ideal behavior.  The signal will flash yellow to warn cars to the presence of pedestrians, and then lead to solid yellow to warn of the upcoming red signal.  THe red signal will force the cars to stop, so that the pedestrians can safely BEGIN their journey.  But after a few seconds (usually at the time when WALK changes to FDW) the red signal becomes a flashing red signal.  Since the cars are already stopped, the cars will remain stopping if there are pedestrians still in the crosswalk.  But if there are no pedestrians there, the cars may proceed after coming to a solid stop.  The HAWK is there to make sure that the cars stop for pedestrians, and not simply stop for a red light that may be longer than necessary, since most pedestrians walk faster than 3.5 ft/sec.

A well designed HAWK will only cause traffic stop long enough to allow the pedestrians to cross, much like the ideal behavior at an unsignalized crosswalk.  As such, the red time should be minimal and warrants aren't necessary, since traffic is only stopped vbriefly.

Just because it's in the MUTCD, doesn't make it right.

Cities like Seattle will use PHB warrants for half signals. Cities in my area will program PHBs to not include the flashing red phase while FDW is on.

The MUTCD is a document, sure. And it's helpful in many cases, yes. But how good of an engineer are you if you follow it blindly?


iPhone